Kis Svyatoslav, Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor, Professor at the Department of Management and Administration, Ivano-Frankivsk National Technical University of Oil and Gas, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ukraine

ORCID ID: 0000-0001-9426-0951
e-mail: svjatkis@gmail.com

Malynovska Halyna, Doctor of Philosophy in specialty 073 «Management», Ivano-Frankivsk National Technical University of Oil and Gas, Ukraine

ORCID ID: 0000-0003-3551-5648
e-mail: malinovska19866@gmail.com

Ivanochko Roman, Postgraduate Student at the Department of Management and Administration, Ivano-Frankivsk National Technical University of Oil and Gas, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ukraine

ORCID ID: 0009-0000-5029-2126
e-mail: roman.ivanochko@nung.edu.ua

Berehovskyi Yurii, Postgraduate Student at the Department of Management and Administration, Ivano-Frankivsk National Technical University of Oil and Gas, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ukraine

ORCID ID: 0009-0002-0042-2724
e-mail: yurii.berehovskyi@nung.edu.ua

Human Capital as a Necessary Condition for Ensuring Enterprise’ Development

Abstract. Introduction. Modern economic processes in socio-economic systems require new sources of resource provision to compensate for the decline in traditional resources and facilitate high-quality changes in economic development. Therefore, although it is important for economic entities to attract material resources of both quantity and quality, the new conditions of the post-industrial, intellectual, knowledge-oriented, innovative, creative, and digital economy prioritize the use of knowledge, abilities, and skills, which are possessed by individuals.

Purpose. The article aims to:

– analyze and interpret the scientific and theoretical basis of human capital in enterprises, with a focus on the category of ‘development’ as a necessary condition for the efficiency and growth of the business.

– justify the conceptual approach to establishing the relationship between the human capital of the enterprise and its development;

– determine ways of transforming the influence on the human capital of the enterprise in order to increase the efficiency of implementation of development processes.

Results. The analysis of scientific approaches to defining and characterizing concepts such as ‘human resources’, ‘human capital’, and ‘development’ demonstrates their high degree of differentiation depending on the signs, criteria, and factors used by domestic and foreign scientists. However, it has been found and substantiated that these categories, which are often referred to for scientific study and improvement, are closely related to each other. If the majority of interpretations of the term ‘human capital’ agree that it refers to knowledge, abilities, skills, experience, and the stock of human health that are utilized by a business entity, then the category of ‘development’ is only considered in a small number of studies that take into account the dominant role of the human factor.

A graph-analytical model of complex management of the quality of the enterprise activity is proposed, which can be taken as a basis for illustration of the development process, and later – the interpretation of the category “development” of the socio-economic system.

Conclusions. It has been established that the development of an enterprise is dependent on the level of intellectualization of its managers and executives. The term “intellectualization” is proposed to be understood as a continuous, endless, dynamic process that ensures the emergence and development of individual and social intelligence, contributes to the improvement of the quality characteristics of the organization, and forms human resources capable of creative analysis and synthesis of information, generation and implementation of own and shared ideas.

The concept of “development” (which can also refer to “enterprise development”) should be understood as a process of qualitative and quantitative changes that occur in the activity of the socio-economic system and are, first of all, a consequence of qualitative transformations (development) of human capital as a result of the implementation of activities based on intellectualization.

Keywords: human capital; development; human resources; human development; enterprise development; economic growth.

References:

1. Malynovska, V. & Kis, H. R. (2020). Rozvytok liudskoho kapitalu yak imperatyv protsesu kapitalizatsii pidpryiemstva. International Scientific Journal “Internauka”. Series: “Economic Sciences”,5(37), 48-58.
2. Tendentsii u sferi upravlinnia personalom. (2019). Deloitte. https://www2.deloitte.com/ua/uk/services/consulting/humancapital.html?icid=top_human-capital.
3. Pyshchulina,, Yurochko, T., Mishchenko, M. & Zhalilo, Ya. (2018). Rozvytok liudskoho kapitalu: na shliakhu do yakisnykh reform: monohr. Kyiv: Zapovit.
4. Kuzmin, O. Ie. & Shakhno, A. Iu. (2018). Otsinka rivnia rozvytku liudskoho kapitalu Ukrainy v umovakh hlobalizatsii. Ekonomika ta derzhava. 7-11.
5. Yalovyi, H. K. (2015). Teoriia liudskoho kapitalu yak metodolohiia formuvannia innovatsiinoi systemy. Ekonomichnyi visnyk Natsionalnoho tekhnichnoho universytetu Ukrainy «Kyivskyi politekhnichnyi instytut». 20-28.
6. Bilska, V. (2016). Liudskyi potentsial i liudskyi kapital: sutnist, transformatsiia, zhyttievyi tsykl. Prychornomorski ekonomichni studii. 7. 26-32.
7. Skibitskyi, O. M. (2019). Rozvytok liudskoho kapitalu pidpryiemstva cherez finansuvannia osvitnikh innovatsii. Pryazovskyi ekonomichnyi visnyk. 3(14). 245-250.
8. Nikolaichuk, M. (2012). Tendentsii ta zakonomirnosti upravlinnia liudskym kapitalom subiektiv hospodariuvannia. Ekonomika rozvytku. 1(61). 63-68.
9. Revtiuk, Ye. A. (2015). Kontseptualni osnovy upravlinnia liudskym kapitalom pidpryiemstv: Ivano-Frankivsk: Simyk.
10. Ukrainska, L. O. (2018). Liudskyi kapital korporatsii: suchasni osoblyvosti formuvannia. Ekonomichna teoriia ta pravo. 2 (33). 42-50. https://doi.org/31359/2411-5584-2018-33-2-42.
11. Dmytruk, S. M. (2014). Vplyv liudskoho kapitalu na rozvytok pidpryiemstva. Sotsialno-trudovi vidnosyny: teoriia ta praktyka. 357-361.
12. Samborska, O. Iu. (2019). Liudskyi kapital yak faktor ekonomichnoho zrostannia. Ekonomika APK. 6. 64-72.
13. Hrishnova, O. A. (2014). Liudskyi, intelektualnyi i sotsialnyi kapital Ukrainy: sutnist, vzaiemozviazok, otsinka ta napriamy rozvytku. Sotsialno-trudovi vidnosyny: teoriia i praktyka. 38-42.
14. Buleev, P., Briukhovetskaia, N. E., Bohachev, S. V. & oth. (2014). Ekonomicheskie i instytutsyonalnye mekhanizmy upravleniia kapitalyzatsyei predpryiatii: monohr. Donetsk: NAN Ukrainy, In-t ekonomiki prom-sti.
15. Becker, S. (1964). Human Capital. N.-Y.: Columbia University Press.
16. Nelson, R. & Phelps, E. S. (1966). Investmentin Humans, Technological Diffusionand Economic Growth. American Economic Review. LVI. 69-75.
17. Lucas, R. E. Jr. & Moll, B. (2014). Knowledge Growth and the Allocation of Time. Journal of Political Economy. 122 (1): 1–51. doi:10.1086/674363.
18. Petrenko, P. & Matskevych O. Iu. (2014). Klasyfikatsiia liudskoho kapitalu pidpryiemstva yak peredumova yoho produktyvnoho vykorystannia. Naukovyi visnyk Khersonskoho derzhavnoho universytetu. Ser.: Ekonomichni nauky. 5 (2). 234-238. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Nvkhdu_en_2014_5%282%29__63.
19. Kis, S. Y (2010). Upravlinnia ekonomichnoiu bezpekoiu pidpryiemstv naftohazovoho kompleksu: dys. … kand. ekon. nauk: spets. 08.00.04 «Ekonomika ta upravlinnia pidpryiemstvamy (naftova i hazova promyslovist)». Ivano-Frankivsk.
20. Hrishnova, O.A. & Brintseva,H. (2015). Fiktyvnyi liudskyi kapital: sutnist, kharakterni osoblyvosti, chynnyky formuvannia. Demohrafiia ta sotsialna ekonomika. 1 (23). 90-101.
21. Dakus, A. & Simchenko, N. O. (2012). Ekonomichnyi rozvytok pidpryiemstva: sutnist ta vyznachennia. Aktualni problemy ekonomiky ta upravlinnia: zbirnyk naukovykh prats molodykh vchenykh. https://ela.kpi.ua/handle/123456789/12350.
22. Ackoff, (1970). A concept of corporate planning. Long Range Planning. 3 (1). 2-8.
23. Seheda, A. (2018). Metodolohichni osnovy katehorii “rozvytok”: filosofskyi aspekt. Ekonomika ta derzhava. 10. 14-22.
24. Pryima, L. R. & Chukhrai, N. I. (2016). Rozvytok pidpryiemstva: teoretychni aspekty. Naukovyi visnyk Khersonskoho derzhavnoho universytetu. 18 (2). 74-77.
25. Horina, H. O. (2016). Dialektyka poniattia «rozvytok pidpryiemstva». Prychornomorski ekonomichni studii. 123-127.
26. Sirko, A. Iu. (2016). Sutnist ta vyznachennia poniattia ekonomichnoho rozvytku pidpryiemstva. Hlobalni ta natsionalni problemy ekonomiky. 541-544.
27. Blahodietielieva-Vovk, S. L. (2006). Pro sut poniat “ekonomichnyi rozvytok” ta “ekonomichne zrostannia”. http:www.e2000.kyiv.org/ biblioteka.
28. Deming, W. E. (1981-82). Improvement of Quality and Productivity Through Action by Management. National Productivity Review. 1, 12-22.
29. Neave, H. (1992). Deming – A New Dimension In Quality. Pablished in association with the Chartered institute of Management Accountants. 3, 99-101.
30. Kis, S. Ya. (2016). Naukovi osnovy intelektualizatsii diialnosti pidpryiemstv: dys. … dokt. ekon. nauk: spets. 08.00.04 «Ekonomika ta upravlinnia pidpryiemstvamy». Ivano-Frankivsk.